Do we need an experimental extension naming convention?
Allen.Wirfs-Brock at microsoft.com
Fri Jul 2 09:23:22 PDT 2010
This might be done with a technique similar to CSS's vender-specific naming conventions (eg, _moz_Proxy) or via namespacing. In either case, we won't necessary need to use vendor names. For example, "TC39exp", is probably a pretty collision safe global name so you might have for example TC39exp.Proxy.
I don't have any personal experience with CSS vender extensions, but my expression is that they may be somewhat a mixed bag from an interoperability perspective. Is this the case? I don't want to send us down a path that is a folly but it does seem like it would be wise to clearly tag experiments as such.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss